DSIT? - sponsoring dept for the EHRC, provide EHRC’s grant-in-aid, oversees governance and performance, is the dept fir serious governance failures at the EHRC and it can esclate to answers in Parliament for EHRC governance issues

raise specific “governance” complaint to EHRC Chair, every member of the Board and the sponsoring department (currently DSIT)

Fail to minute evidence-gathering meeting, inconsistency with standards expected of regulators, reputational and legal risk, impact on trust with marginalised communities.

undermines EHRC claims of neutrality and independence and disproportionately disadvantages our group whose evidence is routinely minimised or contested. This also affects all current JR cases involving the EHRC too. There’s an immediate need to

🤬 This is not an internal matter, it’s a regulatory governance fuckup and intentionally so. It matters way more than it might appear. The absence of minutes makes it impossible to verify what evidence was presented, allows selective memory or post-hoc rationalisation, totally

tacc.org.uk/2025/12/12/t...

The EA addresses trans rights in detail, and expressly protects them. How could its intention have been to undermine the main purpose of the GRA (that a person with a GRC is to be legally recognised as their acquired sex)? And without saying so?

That's not Helen Joyce? Jesus. Are they pulling these people from molds? Or does sanctimonious, hate-riddled hypocrisy create just that exact face

100% right

I was being serious. I used to handle DBSs a couple years ago and ANYONE dealing with minors had to have Enhanced DBS with Child Baring that was renewable annually.

10/
Due process only works if the system actually reads what is sent to it.
Right now, that guarantee is not being met. We’re NOT inferring malicious parties within a certain admin court are scuppering our cases…

SEEN Police – Official Open Network

9/
We have asked the court to urgently correct the record.
But this incident highlights a wider problem: email-based justice is breaking down for litigants in person.

8/
This is especially serious where the case involves policing, human rights, and personal safety.

7/
When courts rely on incomplete files, the consequences are severe:
decisions are made on false premises, rights are lost, and public confidence is damaged.

6/
This is not about “losing a case”.
It is about a systemic administrative failure where a litigant did everything required, yet the system failed to process it.

5/
It now appears those materials were not placed on the court file before the order was made.

4/
The renewal application was filed on time, by email, with a completed Form 86B, a skeleton argument, and a request for an oral hearing. We have timestamped proof.